PDA

View Full Version : The World according to GARP: increase of 32%, companies with several FRM exam takers


DW Simpson
09-06-2005, 02:43 PM
http://www.garp.com/frmexam/download/2005FRMTopCompanies.pdf

As of June 2005, 170+ Organizations are Represented by Five or More 2005 FRM Candidates a 32% Increase from August 2004

Shaft
09-07-2005, 03:56 AM
http://www.garp.com/frmexam/download/2005FRMTopCompanies.pdf

I forecast a devaluation in the FRM designation.....as you can now 'buy' the FRM designation, and enjoy a nice holiday in Switzerland at the same time. PRMIA have kept their integrity, so once the news becomes widespread most candidates will move across to sit for the PRM.

DW Simpson
09-07-2005, 08:04 AM
as you can now 'buy' the FRM designation, and enjoy a nice holiday in Switzerland at the same time.

Can you explain?

Shaft
09-07-2005, 09:28 AM
Can you explain?Cryptic? Moi?

Well, GARP (aka Prof. Rene Stulz, Rik Apostolik) were going to offer a course to "very senior" executives over 7 days in Switzerland at a cost of CH 11,500, followed by an exam (content and rigor unspecified). previously the only way to get the FRM was thru a publically accessible exam open to all. I just checked now and look what is on the website here (http://www.fame.ch/index.cfm?page=/fame/executive_education/grms) of the FAME Academy (yeah, I wanna live for ever, i wanna learn how to fly!).

perhaps the flak there were getting on the interent from other FRM's persuaded them against it.

So you can't 'buy' it now.

Shaft
09-07-2005, 09:34 AM
Here (http://www.fame.ch/index.cfm?page=/fame/executive_education/grms/organization) is the original.

WWSituation
09-08-2005, 09:49 AM
You haven't explained how I could buy the designation. I don't see how grandfathering in the most senior risk managers will devalue it. Look at the EA.

Shaft
09-08-2005, 10:33 AM
You haven't explained how I could buy the designation. I don't see how grandfathering in the most senior risk managers will devalue it. Look at the EA.You can't. Read the post above yours... hence no need to explain.

Sonny
09-13-2005, 11:00 AM
DW Simpson webmaster -- Do you know if many actuaries have attained the FRM designation? This is actually the first time I've heard of it. But I checked out that website and it looks like a very good syllabus that they have put together. It's somewhat comparable to our CAS exam 8 (is it still 8? I don't keep track of the syllabus much anymore).

Thx for the link....

DW Simpson
09-13-2005, 02:39 PM
DW Simpson webmaster -- Do you know if many actuaries have attained the FRM designation?

The SOA directory says 48 credentialed actuaries also have the FRM credential.

There are likely some actuarial analysts who also are FRM-credentialed.

Sonny
09-14-2005, 03:16 PM
The SOA directory says 48 credentialed actuaries also have the FRM credential.

There are likely some actuarial analysts who also are FRM-credentialed.

Thanks for the info....

twig93
09-19-2005, 01:46 PM
Isn't Garp the guy who advocated buying houses that had been hit by airplanes because they were less likely to be hit by airplanes a second time? How prestigious, exactly, is this designation?

JMO Fan
09-28-2005, 04:56 PM
You haven't explained how I could buy the designation. I don't see how grandfathering in the most senior risk managers will devalue it. Look at the EA.Poor example. Some 1970s actuaries who became grandfathered EAs were, despite the designation, very unqualified to do the work. In the '70s, I worked briefly for a pension consulting firm whose EA was a MSPA who couldn't do the calcs. It took three of us (ASA + two 3-examers), directed by one EA/FSA hired by the MSPA, to catch up all the ERISA work he'd backlogged on pension sales. He left once we got halfway caught up, because the FSA could do it all, so he knew his services no longer added value.

In contrast, the ASA and the other 3-examer were among the 80+% who failed the enrollment exam, despite knowing how to do it better than the EA/MSPA. (The low pass % persuaded me to leave & focus on life.)

WWSituation
09-28-2005, 05:52 PM
Poor example. Some 1970s actuaries who became grandfathered EAs were, despite the designation, very unqualified to do the work. In the '70s, I worked briefly for a pension consulting firm whose EA was a MSPA who couldn't do the calcs. It took three of us (ASA + two 3-examers), directed by one EA/FSA hired by the MSPA, to catch up all the ERISA work he'd backlogged on pension sales. He left once we got halfway caught up, because the FSA could do it all, so he knew his services no longer added value.

In contrast, the ASA and the other 3-examer were among the 80+% who failed the enrollment exam, despite knowing how to do it better than the EA/MSPA. (The low pass % persuaded me to leave & focus on life.)

The point was that despite the fact that complete idiots were allowed to be grandfathered as EAs it did not devalue the designation (i.e. the EA is still the bar if you are going to be a pension actuary and that didn't change despite the grandfathering) and I don't think that offering a course to senior CROs to "buy" the FRM will devalue that designation either.

JMO Fan
09-29-2005, 10:38 AM
The point was that despite the fact that complete idiots were allowed to be grandfathered as EAs it did not devalue the designation (i.e. the EA is still the bar if you are going to be a pension actuary and that didn't change despite the grandfathering) and I don't think that offering a course to senior CROs to "buy" the FRM will devalue that designation either.I see your point. Similarly, MAAA reqts in the late '70s went from "FSA + 3 yrs responsible experience + 3 MAAA reference letters" (which were very tough reqts) to ASA. Result: more MAAAs, more recognition (legal & real-world) that MAAA is needed to do the work.

I personally benefited from the change; ASA=MAAA helped me get better jobs, years quicker. However, in all 3 cases (EA, MAAA, FRM), average work value of those with the designation declined. The overall advantages may be worth it, as long as those who met the tougher standard still get opportunities to be rewarded for their greater individual work value.

WWSituation
09-29-2005, 10:55 AM
I see your point. Similarly, MAAA reqts in the late '70s went from "FSA + 3 yrs responsible experience + 3 MAAA reference letters" (which were very tough reqts) to ASA. Result: more MAAAs, more recognition (legal & real-world) that MAAA is needed to do the work.

I personally benefited from the change; ASA=MAAA helped me get better jobs, years quicker. However, in all 3 cases (EA, MAAA, FRM), average work value of those with the designation declined. The overall advantages may be worth it, as long as those who met the tougher standard still get opportunities to be rewarded for their greater individual work value.

The critical difference as well is that FRM doesn't have the value of an actuarial designation to begin with. Like the CFA, it doesn't certify that you can necessarily do anything, but they are more genaralist in nature. Both credentials (CFA and FRM) imply that you have enough of an entry level base to specialize in the area, whereas actuarial credentials like EA and MAAA give immediate value to one's signature. To devalue a designation like the FRM implies that there is great value there to begin with, and relative to an actuarial designation there really isn't. It's not like a new FRM is all of a sudden going to be reassigned to risk budgeting projects that were previously being done by non-FRM risk managers - or is it?